About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
CSPAN2 5
CSPAN 4
MSNBCW 4
KNTV (NBC) 3
MSNBC 3
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
CNBC 1
CNN 1
CNNW 1
KTVU (FOX) 1
WBAL (NBC) 1
WBFF (FOX) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 40
Search Results 0 to 39 of about 40 (some duplicates have been removed)
, former republican senator chuck hagel, came under fire from members of his own party during a very contentious confirmation hearing. >> name one person in your opinion who's intimidated by the israeli lobby in the united states senate. >> are we right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. >> senator hagel, please answer the question i asked. today, do you think unilateral sanctions would be a bad idea? >> all this raising questions about how effective chuck hagel will be if confirmed as secretary of defense. earlier this weekend, i sat down for a rare joint interview with the top military leadership the outgoing secretary f defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general martin dempsey. >>> secretary panetta, welcome back to "meet the press." general dempsey, welcome. let me start with the man that is poised to take your place. he underwent on thursday a pretty tough round of questioning. he seemed to struggle with a lot of the answers. of course this is chuck hagel, the former republican senator from nebraska. look at some of his answers. >
this is chuck hagel, the former republican senator from nebraska. look at some of his answers. >> i should have used another term, and i'm sorry. i would like to go back and change the words and the meaning. the bigger point is, what i was saying, i think -- what i meant to say, should have said, is recognizable. it's been recognized, is recognized. well, i said it. and i don't remember the context or when i said it. well, i said what i said. i said many, many things over many years. that's what i should have said. and thank you. >> secretary panetta, many of those answers did not satisfy a lot of republicans. senator roy blunt is going to vote no. he said his answers were too inconsistent particularly related to iran and israel. marco rubio said i've been deeply concerned about his plef previous comments. john barrasso, he appeared weak and wobbly. are you concerned? >> well, everyone you quoted is a republican, and it's pretty obvious that the political knives were out for chuck hagel. >> and you think that was totally personal, partisan? >> well, what disappointed me is they talked a lot abo
on television. today in a 58-40 cloture voted. they blocked chuck hagel being the sex -- secretary of defense. next the hour long debate on the nomination. they said they will not vote for cloture today, i think it's too bad. there's been more than enough time to read the additional speeches that have been coming in. the argument raced beyond that i know has do with the payment an equity fund that was received has been fully explained. as a highly reputable fund that senator hagel was an adviser to like many other reputable people. i think the continuation what amounts to filibuster is too bad when there's a secretary of defense who is leafing to go back to california. we need to have our new secretary of defense in place given the circumstances in this world. we have a budget crisis in this country, our scwesser is confronting us. that's sequester will have a damaging effect on the deference department, on the men and women in uniform. and on the programs, the equipment, the training that they need to be ready for any kind of contingency. so the delay in having a vote on cloture, to me is a
, that holds true. what happened here is that hagel's performance at his hearing and some of the questions that have come up, some of the unanswered questions, have dragged that out. there are two factions of republicans who have slowed this down. a group focused solely on hagel wanting more information and that includes the new texas senator ted cruz who has been particularly critical of hagel in raising questions about his ties to foreign groups that might have provided him some salary during the years sips he left the senate. that's been very harsh questioning. on the other hand, there was a small faction of mccain, graham, and ayotte, who wanted more information about benghazi. i just spoke to them, and they said they believe that taking the stand was very effective. they got a letter from the white house that provided them more information. they got testimony from secretary panetta and the joint chiefs chair dempsey, and they believe that added to what the public knows about benghazi and was the right way to go about this. when brennan comes up to be cia director expect another one of
we have 68,000 young men and women serving there. >> are you confident of chuck hagel? have you spent time with him? you guys have to have a partnership. secretary of defense, chairman of the joint chiefs of staffs, whether you like each other or are not, are you confident you can have a good relationship with him? >> i have spent time with senator hagel, including when he was teaching over at georgetown, on strategic issues. and in helping prepare him for this confirmation hearings, we had several opportunities to talk about strategy. and i found him well prepared and very thoughtful about it. >> were his answers to you better than the answers you saw there? >> i'm not going to grade his homework. but in my conversations, he was well prepared, articulate, concise. >> and you're confident he can do the job? >> i'm not going to speak about confidence. he could be my boss. when is the last time you saw a subordinate discuss the confidence in his boss? my personal contacts with him have been very positive. if he's confirmed, i look forward to working with him. >> senator lindsey graham s
currency war? we're going have to talk about that all next up. >>> later in the show, is chuck hagel's nomination going down in flames? it's definitely frozen for now. hagel has yet to turn over the information of who his foreign funding sources were after he left the u.s. senate. that could kill him. we'll have the latest. and please don't forget, free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity. that includes lower spending and limited government. i'm larry kudlow. we'll be right back. ♪ get ready for a lot more of that new-plane smell. we're building the youngest, most modern fleet among the largest us airlines to ensure that you are more comfortable and connected than ever. we are becoming a new american. all right that's a fifth-floor probleok.. not in my house! ha ha ha! ha ha ha! no no no! not today! ha ha ha! ha ha ha! jimmy how happy are folks who save hundreds of dollars switching to geico? happier than dikembe mutumbo blocking a shot. get happy. get geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or mor . welcome back. we'll take a quick look at the stock mark
lindsay graham believes the senate should hold up the confirmation ofs of john brennan an chuck hagel until the white house releases more information on the deadly benghazi for attack. senator graham wants to know exactly what the president was doing that tragic night. >> i don't think we should allow brennan to go forward for the c.i.a. director ship, hagel to be confirmed to secretary of defense secretary of defense. did the president ever pick up the phone and call anyone to help these folks? >> what does this mean? joining us, a former media spokesperson for president george w. bush and joe mansion a democrat. mercedes and chris, welcome. mercedes, let me start with you. what does this mean if the senator is saying we're going to hold up these critical nominations until we find out about the president's activity that night? >> we've been waiting for months from the white house to figure out what happened in ban gaza. when you look at what susan rice mentioned on benghazi with her talking points, that basically saying that this was due to a protest. we know that wasn't the case. we
secretary leon panetta came out in support of chuck hagel. president obama's choice for defense secretary. >> what you've heard from republicans thus far has been, why -- where is the calvary in all of this, why didn't the military over the course of what we've been told was a seven-hour incident if you can call it an incident. why over the course of seven hours was there not a strike team of some sort that could be put into benghazi to try to help out. on the show today, i had not just leon panetta, but as well the chairman of the joint chiefs, martin dempsey, and i asked them that very question, like why wouldn't you on 9/11, have troops sort of ready? and dempsey said to me, we did, the minute we knew the incident happened, the secretary of defense said, move some troops, scramble some troops, get them ready, let us know what their transit time would be. that's where it ended. i said, why didn't you just move them at that moment when you knew there was trouble. here's what dempsey said. >> we can't be a replacement. it was 9/11 elsewhere in the world not just in libya. >> that's pretty
continue to supply weapons. >> chris: then there is the president's nominee, former senator chuck hagel, at his confirmation hearing, it is fair to say you gave him a real going-over about his opposition to the iraq troop surge in 2007. let's look at that: >> we are correct or incorrect? yes or no? >> my reference to the -- >> answer the question, senator hagel. the question is: were you right or wrong? >> chris: i have a question for you, how will you vote on the hagel nomination? >> we still have more information, but, again, that was not be a academic discussion i was having with him. we were losing the war in 2006. and, when the president came around, bush, who i had been very critical of, sent david petraeus and the surge, we succeeded in iraq and now, because of the obama administration's action afterwards we are losing, very badly unraveling, but the fact is the we hadn't done that more american lives would have been lost unnecessarily. so, for then senator hagel to say, well, he'll let history be the judge, he was there and involved. and i'm sure he is wrong and knows he's wrong
on the other side who are supporting hagel, senator hagel for being the next secretary of defense. .. that letter of solidarity for israel. the same. the same thing as a clearing the rain and revolution guard a terrorist group. he was one of only four who did that. so i would only say, this is not a filibuster. everybody knows it's not a filibuster. i hope the media is listing that they are. this is the same thing required by the democrats and the cases john doe tim steve johnson, the case of rob portman. it is the prerogative of the senate. it's not a filibuster. they nearly won a 60-vote margin. i commented earlier that we had a republican in the white house in a majority in the senate. i was here and never objected to that. then of course you had kathleen sebelius right now, cabinet position. secretary of commerce john brace and objected to him. so the only issue here is the 60-vote margin. it's not a filibuster on the last thing i say is i will read again to their last speaker and are very good friend is the chairman of the committee when he said the other day and i wholeheart
second round. if they are interested, they should let us know. the meeting of our committee and the hagel nomination of the scheduled at 230 will begin at 2:45 p.m. because we have two votes at 2:15 p.m. two votes at 2:15 p.m. this afternoon. after consulting with senator inhofe, we are going to begin our meeting this afternoon at 2:45 p.m. instead of 2:30 p.m. i've asked everybody to vote early so that we can begin promptly at 2:45 p.m. this afternoon. now, i'm going to call on senator graham, then i will go to senator shaheen. senator graham? >> thank you, gentlemen, thank you for coming. thank you for having this hearing. i can't think of a better topic to be talking about. can you tell us about this is? >> senator, i have a degree in english from duke university, the answer is yes. i don't know what it's going to take. maybe it gets everyone's attention, from a navy perspective, if sequestration is implemented, will he have less naval bases? >> well, senator, that falls under the base closure realignment process. >> how many ships will they have? >> if sequestration is enacted over th
. on december of 2012, senator chuck hagel was nominee to become the secretary of defense. when he was asked about the outgoing secretary leon panetta's comments about budget sequestration that would be disastrous to national defense, the senator replied as follows. the defense department, i think in many ways, has been bloated. the defense department has gotten everything it has wanted. the last 10 years and more. we have taken priorities, dollars, programs, policies out of the state department. and another of other departments and put them in defense. the abuse and waste and fraud is astounding. .. with him or her >> or something like that. it was obvious that in some places had accumulated over the decades that is why secretary gates started the efficiency initiative that i was a part of to improve performance and requisition system. in parallel, we had absorbed for madrid $87 billion budget cut in a way wear we said we could still accomplish the mission of the nation speaking to the fact we could do what the country needed with less. but today we cannot do that strategy. so we have accom
. on december 2012, senator chuck hagel was the nominee to become the next secretary of defense. he had an interview with the financial times. when he was asked about that outgoing secretary secretary panetta's comments, you replied as followed, "the defense followed in many ways and has been bloated. it has gotten everything it has wanted the last 10 years and more. we have taken priorities, dollars, programs, policies out of the state department and put them over into defense. the abuse and waste and the fraud is astounding. the pentagon needs to be pared down. me the pentagon to look at their own priorities." we are pressed for times. -- the pentagon needs to look at their own priorities." we are pressed for times. you agree with this general perception that senator hagel -- chuck hagel made. that would be great. >> that is a good question. it is a fair question. i cannot speak for senator hagel. my interpretation is that it is along the lines of something that secretary gates used to say. we had accumulated over the decade post 9/11 when our budget was going up every year. when your
to the same committee room that we will take you to now. we went there to hear defense nominee chuck hagel's testimony. they will come in soon. a little bit later, at 2:30 p.m. in the senate intelligence committee, john brennan's confirmation will be life. you see senator mccain. you have the ranking for the senate armed service committee. this should begin in a second. let us watch. we will cavill and to hear from defense secretary leon panetta and general martin dempsey about the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi that resulted in the death of four americans. one week ago today, this committee heard from senator chuck hegel -- hagel to be the next defense secretary. the center of south carolina said he would put a hold on former senator hagel's nomination unless leon panetta agreed to testify. this is the first of two harris we will show you today. this and later this afternoon, the confirmation hearing for cia director nominee, john brennan, currently the counter-terrorism chief. >> good morning, everybody. we welcome secretary of defense leon panetta and the chairman of the joint
nomination than was chuck hagel the week before. he was far more confident, far more informed, authoritative. but this is the first time it was ever debated, the subject. i mean it's gone undebated. and i have to concede that much of the criticism, i think from conservative press is absolutely valid. if this were george w. bush and dick cheney and we had increased by sixfold the number of unmanned attacks on other countries that are not combatant countries, that were not at war with, there would have been far more hue and cry. and it is interesting that the president, the only criticism in the president seems to be among a few liberals, and the support seems to be from people like john bolton-- and so it's a debate i think we have to have, we should have and it's been cloaked in secrecy and secrecy is the sacrosanct secular religion of this city. >> woodruff: so this has stirred it up? >> i think so, because of the leaked memo and the system, we are having a debate about drones. and i guess if i want a drone policy i want it run by a franciscan, not a jesuit. but he didn't really defend it,
. senator hagel. later today i'm going to be talking to john brennan. can you give a brief assessment of the two gentle and the capability and the readiness to assume the positions? >> yes, certainly. obviously that's something that the committees now have the opportunity evaluate. but in my view, both of them are outstanding individuals that have a great deal of experience and capability to be able to perform in an outstanding fashion in each of their jobs. senator hagel is someone who, you know, served in the military, worked up here on the hill. understand the issues that are involve there had. i think can be a very effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with the at the director of cia and continued to work with in this capacity. i found him to be responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations again al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is -- as somebody said, a straight shooter. somebody who, you know, gives you his best opinion, he doesn't play games. he is somebody who i think, you know, can honestly represent the
confirms a new defense secretary. the president has nominated former senator chuck hagel. this is just under an hour. ♪ [applause] ♪ >> review. ♪ ♪ ["yankee doodle" plays] >> ladies and gentleman, please stand for the playing of the united states national anthem. >> present arms. >> present arms. ["the star-spangled banner" plays] >> please be seated. [indiscernible] >> ready. hut. ladies and gentlemen, general dempsey. [applause] >> mr. president, secretary and mrs. panetta, ambassadors, members of congress, men and women of the armed forces of the united states, especially our wounded warriors, and we cannot forget bravo. i was hoping bravo would be out there for the inspection of troops, but apparently jeremy thought differently. it is an honor to be here for this event. we're here to show our profound respect and thanks to secretary panetta. i recall play "the tempest," which is a nice metaphor, and i like to think of you as the prospero of public service. the secretary has used his arts to imbue a sense of public service in generations of the men and women. and like that k
carolina senator lindsey graham who threatened to hold up the confirmation for chuck hagel, his successor. so what did the president know about the benghazi attack september 11, when did he know about it and what did he do about it? sources i talked to say panetta and others are carrying out the orders of the commander-in-chief. so what were they and how were they handled. expect fireworks. rick: later on this afternoon the president's nominee the head of the cia takes center stage. >> reporter: expect john brenner to get plenty of questions about the use of enhanced interrogation techniques during this time at cia. he left there in 2005. at the white house they are emphasizing brennan's experience. >> mr. brennan brings, i think, not on a vast amount of experience, but a significant perspective on the battles that we wage in this effort. and the right way to conduct them. so the president believes the senate should and will confirm john brennan expeditiously. >> reporter: expect him to get questions about how involved he was in interrogation techniques at the cia. rick: senator lindsey g
, john brennan and for defense secretary, chuck hagel unless the president provides more information on the september 2012 attack on our consulate in benghazi, libya. listen to this. >> how could they say after panetta and dempsey said it was a terrorist attack that night, how could the president say for two weeks after the attack it was the result of a video? how could susan rice come on to show to say there is no evidence of a terrorist attack when sick tear of defense and joint chiefs knew that that night? i think that was a misleading narrative three weeks before our election. >> he is hanging onto this in a big way. joining me, kt mcfarland, fox news security analyst . what do you think he is saying, kt? >> what he is talking about is the most significant part. and that is the president had nothing to do with this. that the secretary of defense and the chairman of joint chiefs of staff now said at the beginning of this attack american embassy under attack, american ambassador gone missing they told the president and that was it. the president had nothing more to do with it. mart
hagel is who served in the military and worked up here on the hill and understands the issues involved there and can be a very effective leader at the pentagon. john brennan is somebody i worked with as director of the c.i.a. and continue to work with in this capacity. and i always found him to be very responsible about how we can effectively conduct operations against al qaeda and against those that would attack this country. he is somebody a straight shooter, somebody who gives you his best opinion. he doesn't play games. he's someone who i think can really honestly represent the best protection of this country in that job. >> thank you very much. and i want to thank you for your forth right comments today about the sequester. ironically as what you said in your statement, it appears the greatest threat to the united states security is the united states congress. thank you, mr. secretary. >> thank you. let me mention this, after senator nelson, the first round will be over. there may be a number of us who may want a few minutes on the second round and you two witnesses have been here
Search Results 0 to 39 of about 40 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)